Understandings of Development Should Encompass Religion

The challenges of development, religious harmony,
and ending conflicts are so intertwined that the separate approaches to each
facet that are so commonly followed make little sense. As president of the
World Bank (1995-2005), I worked to expand and redefine our operations in this
common spirit. Forging links among three areas proved especially controversial:
stepping up action to respond to conflicts and natural disasters; dealing with
the overhang of indebtedness; and engaging systematically with religious
institutions. That peace and religion are both at the heart of development was
even more obvious during my work in the Middle East as the Quartet’s
representative from 2005 to 2006.

Reconstruction
after conflict, especially in developing countries, needs to be swift,
purposeful, and undertaken with an eye both to urgent needs and long-term
strategies. Wars and conflicts, like those that raged in the Balkans during my
term as World Bank president, leave people in parlous circumstances. Speedy
response is essential so that, within the limits of what is possible, hardship
is alleviated and reconstruction can advance. Rather surprisingly, many members
of the Board of Executive Directors, who represent the World Bank’s member
countries, questioned this extension of our reconstruction work, arguing that
we should engage in physical reconstruction only when peace was firmly in place
and formally established authorities explicitly invited us in. We should only
launch programs with this formal structure as the task of immediate
intervention belonged to humanitarian agencies that typically responded quickly
(but with inevitably limited scope and means). Board members were especially
wary that we might be forced to take sides between parties where religious
tensions were involved, worrying that we would be caught up in difficult
political and diplomatic issues.

We did step
up our response to reconstruction and other interventions in fragile states
(with strong and courageous staff support). In the Balkans we moved quickly
into conflict areas as soon as fighting had nearly stopped. We made great
contributions to saving human lives and establishing the foundations for
peaceful reconstruction. The Red Cross and similar institutions were already
engaged in the last stages of conflict and religious organizations often played
positive roles. None of the existing players had the same capacity and
experience as the World Bank. By moving quickly we were able to accelerate
progress and move toward real development.

Our work in reconstruction around the world and the intensive debates
and ultimately transformative action involved in efforts to address poor
country debt (where religious organizations were deeply engaged) confirmed my
long-standing sense about the importance of religious actors in development—a
blind spot for many of my World Bank colleagues. Under my leadership, the World
Bank began to engage religious groups not just in reconstruction but in
combating poverty and promoting development more broadly. One source of
inspiration came through my friendship with Monseigneur
Paglia and his colleagues from the Rome-based
Community of Sant’Egidio, whose rich experience coincided with my initial thoughts.
My next step was to contact the renowned Protestant leader, Archbishop of
Canterbury George Carey, who was keenly interested in these issues. I spoke to
my longtime friend, the Aga Khan, to get a sense of possible Islamic reactions.
Finally, Cardinal McCarrick of the Catholic Church, in Washington, gave me
a sense of
Rome’s interest in the close connection between religion and development.

After these
preliminary discussions, George Carey and I convened a conference with a range
of senior religious leaders in February 1998 at Lambeth Palace in London, to
test out the idea of launching a bold dialogue among faith and development
leaders. We had to determine how world religions could be brought to support a
common plan to reduce poverty that would link faith-run programs with the many
other civil society initiatives. The idea was to build mutually supportive
programs that would have a large and lasting impact on poverty. George Carey
and I convened a further conference in Washington in November 1999 to develop
specific plans to engage a larger group of religious leaders. We agreed to
establish a modest institution to build solid and creative partnerships. But
rather to my surprise the World Bank’s Executive Directors raised a host of
objections. After extensive consultations we moved forward but were frankly
stymied by the hesitations that the very topic of religion unleashed.

On September
11, 2001, the terrorist attack aimed at the World Trade Center in New York and
the Pentagon in Washington, ironically, made leaders of countries and
institutions more responsive to bringing religious leaders together with civil
society. Thus we organized a third meeting in Canterbury (the largest so far)
in October 2002, with more than 50 religious leaders. On the first day, there
was much apprehension and some tension. It was a first ever where such a wide
spectrum of leaders engaged on issues of alleviating poverty and responding to
conflict. After 24 hours, the group came together in an exceedingly
constructive way. Many joint initiatives followed. What was most important was
that in individual situations local religious leaders were able and willing to
work constructively with each other as well as with civil society and aid
organizations. This was something quite new and potentially of immeasurable
value.

The group’s
final meeting took place in Dublin in January 2005, on the invitation of
Archbishop Diarmuid Martin. He, George Carey (no longer archbishop of
Canterbury), and I shared the chairmanship. We reviewed what we had achieved
and gave a final push to both religious and lay leaders to come together to
their mutual advantage. We agreed that the World Faiths Development Dialogue
(WFDD), led by Katherine Marshall, should have its base in Washington and
should pursue the initiative, albeit cautiously and often under the radar given
manifold sensitivities. I am deeply pleased that WFDD, under Katherine’s
dynamic leadership, and from its base at Georgetown University’s Berkley
Center, has pursued both the ideals and the practical opportunities it offers.

I left the
World Bank in June 2005 to take up my position as the envoy in the Middle East.
My task was to do all that I could to bring the Israelis and the Palestinians
together to their mutual advantage and to encourage the other Arab nations,
with whom I had been privileged to have great contact while at the World Bank,
to join in the international peace efforts. Much could be said about that
situation but it would take a new book. Suffice it to note that once again the
situation offers great positive potential. Sadly, instead of working for common
benefits for human life and the dignity of those concerned (political and civil
society, secular and religious), the negotiators have yet to find common
ground.
Finding this common ground and the creative
approaches that can come from breaking down the walls among different sectors
and approaches lie at the heart of what is vitally needed to bring about peace
and truly improve people’s lives. The experience of the past two decades of
working to build partnerships with a wide range of religious leaders and
institutions is a testimony to how much more can be achieved when this common
ground is defined and when there the different parties listen and learn from
each other.